• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Horza

  • Rank
    right now there's a man who could take advantage

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    'Straya, love it or leave it!

Recent Profile Visitors

9,740 profile views
  1. Knight's Templar vrs Samurai

    Are you kidding? Jaques de Molay could have bought those topknotted chumps three times over.
  2. Nah, they're both fine, but Cher's house style is something else.
  3. UK Politics: The Overton Defenestration

    This says so much about the mentality of Brexiteers it's hard to know where to start.
  4. Cher is one of the greatest things ever to happen to twitter.

    I'm not seeing any wild differences here, particularly when you account for the difference in timescales. If you look at the poll averages for both years from the 1st of June (when the nomination process is basically done) to the 11th of September, the dynamics are almost identical - the Democrat leads consistently (in Obama's case by less, consistent with his opponent not being a reality tv star who courts anime nazis), the Republican's bounce from the convention tightens things, the Democratic bounce restores distance, the race narrows from there. Real instability would be constant, wild swings in lead, which we may yet see as this thing gets closer.

    When was this time when Trump stopped making offensive remarks? In general the polls have been pretty stable, with Clinton in a slight lead nationwide and in most of the battleground states. The convention bump has washed out and I guess a lot of people were hoping it was her new baseline, but you're still looking at a candidate with pretty low favourability, doing that tricky succeeding-an-incumbent-president thing with an electorate that's never liked politics less (also, a bit of a youthful enthusiasm gap this time). Polarisation being what it is, Republicans are still clinging to Trump and as never-Trumpers never got their act together (outside of maybe Utah) there's just not that big wedge in his coalition to make things really uncertain.

    Deliberately calculated moves that you have to rephrase the next day are pretty much the definition of unforced errors. And Hilary Clinton has made a few in her time, particularly when in front.

    There's not much to fear, but that's because the lines have largely been drawn already. It's also why there's basically nothing to be gained from calling voters deplorable, no matter how deplorable they might be. The way polarisation is playing out, the people so labelled aren't going to change their minds, and the people she's associating with the deplorables will use the fact it comes from Hilary Clinton to deflect the substance. This is why having the candidate make the attack was a mistake.

    The Deplorables thing can be true and still be bad politics: Having the candidate outright say that half the opponent's supporters are white supremacists is the worst possible use of that fact. It's something that the campaign should be using to tie up all the Basket holders, but that's gone now that it's a pithy attack line in the candidate's own words. Now the Basket is a badge of pride for those in it and a baseless partisan attack line in the minds of the Basket holders that they can now play mock outrage with. It will allow all the Basket holders to change the topic to their outrage at being called Basket people and give a bunch of loosely Basket-adjacent people who otherwise might have drifted away a stronger sense of identity and common cause by virtue of the power of negative identification. It's not going to cost Clinton votes, but it will help the Basket bind more tightly together and endure.
  10. Demise of ITT Tech

    Just another chapter in ITT's glorious corporate history
  11. US Elections - There is 'Ahead in the Polls' behind you

    Specifically, move the old party hand/dictator lobbyist loofah back a-ways and push forward the far right muckracker Lay-Z-Boy. Conway seems like a sensible piece of furniture by comparison.
  12. Attempted Coup in Turkey

    I don't follow, what are you saying here?
  13. Attempted Coup in Turkey

    It's clear that there was suspicion, because a lot of the apparent plotters were facing the sack at an upcoming military hearing. I guess you could argue that this was a dastardly clever way of inciting them into this coup, but why tip your hand like that at all if you want to encourage them to take action? You keep saying the risks can be minimised, but why would a study in paranoia like Erdogan be playing with matches like this, when his entire political life has been shaped by a well-founded distrust of the Turkish military and political establishment?
  14. Attempted Coup in Turkey

    Shirer, writing in the 50s without access to a fraction of the archival material historians can now draw upon, relies heavily upon Gisevius's testimony at Nuremberg but Gisevius for fairly obvious reasons needs to be taken with a grain of salt. In the mid '60s the 'Nazi foreknowledge' consensus swung around to the 'lone arsonist' theory after Fritz Tobias and Hans Mommsen's work. That consensus survived a revival of the foreknowledge thesis in the 90s, but now that thesis is under challenge by a new interpretation that undermines Tobias's evidence and revives the 'foreknowledge' case. As per the link, Richard Evans doesn't think much of the arguments (though apparently Ian Kershaw is much more impressed (Ctrl-F 'Kershaw' for it, and it would have been nice if Hett had given a citation for the quote)), but as Hett freely admits, the strongest point in defence of van der Lubbe as a lone actor is that nobody has plausibly connected him to the Nazis. Scott, I think I made my points pretty clearly. You're free to disagree, but yanno, make a case.